How to Choose the Right CRC for High Confidence Error Detection?

Emanresu
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have a small fixed size packet of information that I want to transmit and detect errors with a high degree of confidence (no correction is required). I'm guessing that a CRC is probably the way to go but don't know how to work out what form of CRC to use. I want to be able to specify a value for the likelihood of failure to detect an error.

If for example I wanted the likelihood of failure to detect an error to be 1 in a billion when the probability of an error is high, say 10%, how do I work out how to achieve this ?

E.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Shannon's theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon's_theorem tells you how much error correction you need for a given degree of failure on a noisy channel.
In practice it largely depends on if you expect the noise to be fairly constant, changing bits in each word, or bursty, corrupting long sequences of data.
The wiki link has good links to different error correcting codes.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top